Russian activist and Putin critic Alexei Navalny dies in prison

a reply to: andy06shake

Did you read my pm, Andy?

'Nice' (I mean effective) distraction from the more important things. 420 comments already.

Some more important things:

link #1 (and the rest in the same thread; always scroll until you see darkblue; link #5 explains why, although it's missing 2 Tim 4:3,4, which can be found pretty much everywhere in the other threads/links)
link #2
link #3
link #4
link #5

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit

Being a CIA Asset is a very Dangerous Business .

The pay is pretty good though.

originally posted by: gortex

Not nearly as dangerous as getting on the wrong side of Putin , ask Yevgeny Prigozhin , Boris Nemtsov , Sergei Magnitsky , Natalya Estemirova , Aleksandr Litvinenko , Anna Politkovskaya , Sergei Yushenkov.

I must say no one does coating a doorknob with high levels of radiation better than Putin.

originally posted by: AllisVibration
They all seem piss poor to me

This seems to be a common opinion and I wonder why. Who do you think would be good?

The real answer is someone not on social media. I think the 24/7 social media blasting whatever someone does basically makes everyone see them as total crap leaders..i.e. human.

I was amazed at how fast people turned on DeSantis. The guy who pushed back on the lockdowns and mandates told them to stuff it. The guy who pushes back hard on the Trans agenda and CRT with all of the liberal side attacking him. The guy that is extremely good at telling the media they are full of it to their face. He did everything right and once the media got a hold of him he was shoved into the trashcan by the Right so fast it was unbelievable.

Then after that, we get comments like yours that all suck, so what doesn't suck... Not really to you but to everyone.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Imhere
Sheesh.

If wasn’t for this thread that apparently turned into a therapy session/distraction, of what went down past days in Avdeevka, heads would explode over the total collapse of one of most fortified areas in Ukraine.

Considering the Russia/Ukraine thread is basically crickets over there in comparison.

Avdeevka is interesting. There are no military gains there, but Putin wanted it for at least one victory. The cost was over 17,000 Russian deaths as they just flooded it with bodies, 10,000s more badly injured, 500 to 1000 tanks, and 1000s of other vehicles. Most thought Russia would take it over a month ago.

It was a gruesome display of zero value for life on the Russian side. So they took 1 km of a small town that is 100% rubble. There are 100s more small towns all the way to Kyvi.

One of the issues is that resupplies were delayed by America with the long fight over the bill. Well, that is done and supplies are now pouring in once again. I guess on to the next little crap town, or Ukraine might just take it back.

I hear you and understand your view point.

However, when you put emotion/personal bias off to the side. And if you look at it from both sides. It leads to a more well rounded discussion.

The military gains/advantages of Avdeevka were indeed remarked and stressed from both sides.

- UA forces spent years prior to 22’ fortifying Avdeevka.
(other “crap towns” ahead aren’t nearly as fortified/unique defensively)

- It’s a major logistical hub.

- UA forces proudly harped it was one of their most fortified areas in Ukraine/debatable being one of the most fortified areas currently in Europe.

- It’s remarked by Zelensky and others that if Russia gains that foothold, especially being a major logistical hub etc, it gives them a strong springboard going forward in other areas.

- Russian forces performed other maneuvers not seen yet such as hammering/bombarding heavily entrenched targets with dozens of FABS at a frequency not seen yet, especially on a single area.

-it’s been remarked that Russia used other ingenuity and took advantage

- Russia has in fact upped their missile production and it’s being observed.

A far cry from people going around posting “Russia ran out of missiles!!!” Etc over a year ago. Based merely on bias/emotions being against Russia etc, which is counter productive.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: silentbunker

De Nazification?

Evil NATO?

Melt?

Thanks to your little tin God, both are melting.

-- To OldCarpy and other members of ATS --

Sorry if some of my reactions were rather delusional.

I have serious health conditions.
Unable to connect with other people in a healthy way.
Sites like ATS ain't good for me.
I won't react no more.
I need to take my healing process seriously.
Thank you for your understanding.

All the best.

a reply to: Threadbarer

This is my favorite ATS thread ever. The anger at putin is absolutely hilarious given that he's basically the idol of most the people pretending they care, in this thread.

When I say idol, I don't mean love for putin. The programmed hatred of him has been successful. Rather, that what he does, you cheer in your own countries. Suppress "hate speech." Check. Use the law to go after political opponents. Check. Bomb other countries for perceived threats. Check. Cry out in pain as he strikes others. Check.

Putin is the shunned success story of modern day leftists. It baffles me that they can't see the brainwashing they've been subjected to.

originally posted by: Imhere

-it’s been remarked that Russia used other ingenuity and took advantage

- Russia has in fact upped their missile production and it’s being observed.

A far cry from people going around posting “Russia ran out of missiles!!!” Etc over a year ago. Based merely on bias/emotions being against Russia etc, which is counter productive.

It wasn't Russia that ran out of anything, it was the Ukrainians who ran out. That delay in getting the bill passed put Ukraine in a very supply-limited situation. We will see in the near future how good, or not, Avdeevka plays into future wins for Russia.

originally posted by: Fairlite

Putin is the shunned success story of modern day leftists. It baffles me that they can't see the brainwashing they've been subjected to.

Putin is that you? When Putin is asked about his horrendous acts he says look at others... Kind of what you did here.

So how should people see Putin?

He is a ruthless leader. I compare him to Kim Jong where 80% of Russians live in abject poverty using 1940s or early living conditions, but they seem to still love him.

Maybe they fear him and can't do anything about it, such a closed society like NK. Putin has gone past 400k of his people in this war and doesn't blink. The US lost about 2200 in 20 years in Afghanistan so not comparable in any way. Those deaths and the 100,000s of Ukrainians are not his fault by his words... If they would just give up then there would be no deaths, so all deaths are the US fault.

Do you agree?

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Imhere

-it’s been remarked that Russia used other ingenuity and took advantage

- Russia has in fact upped their missile production and it’s being observed.

A far cry from people going around posting “Russia ran out of missiles!!!” Etc over a year ago. Based merely on bias/emotions being against Russia etc, which is counter productive.

It wasn't Russia that ran out of anything, it was the Ukrainians who ran out. That delay in getting the bill passed put Ukraine in a very supply-limited situation. We will see in the near future how good, or not, Avdeevka plays into future wins for Russia.

What about this past hyped UA unsuccessful summer offensive?

The feud between Zelensky and the popular general who he ousted recently blamed one of the reasons on losing Bahkmut etc. (which some others emotionally retorted was just a “small city with zero significance” etc afterwards)

Hampering it because Zelensky kept throwing valuable men and resources into it, when stubbornly not pulling out for PR points.

There’s more at play here and not easily pointed at a “delay in aid”. As shown in the previous hyped unsuccessful summer offensive.

But we’ll see as you mentioned how well other defenses will hold.

originally posted by: Imhere

What about this past hyped UA unsuccessful summer offensive?

The feud between Zelensky and the popular general who he ousted recently blamed one of the reasons on Bahkmut etc.

So, not sure of your point. Ukranie success is Russia has stalled out and not that Ukraine has pushed them back. Every month Russia loses about 30k troops and a massive amount of equipment.

The delay was huge Russia was still using 10,000 155, and Ukraine was down to almost nothing. I have already said that Russia will win the long war, but at what cost? If the US gets involved with missiles, Air Force, and Space Force the war is over in a week without a single boot on the ground and no need to use fighters, A-10s, or Apaches. ETC. But if we did put that into play...lol

a reply to: Xtrozero

This seems to be a common opinion and I wonder why. Who do you think would be good?

Tom Cruise or Sylvester Stallone maybe? Tom does his own stunts at least and can get passionate and rousing. I’m not sure about that Scientology stuff though…

In all seriousness anyone who isn’t a puppet of the 5th column, Ron Paul would have made a great president but nobody with any integrity gets anywhere near, we just get these puppet muppets set up to create even more apathy and division. It’s the same throughout the west. Pathetic really, I think the documentary “century of the self” explains where we are in a nutshell.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Imhere

What about this past hyped UA unsuccessful summer offensive?

The feud between Zelensky and the popular general who he ousted recently blamed one of the reasons on Bahkmut etc.

So, not sure of your point. Ukranie success is Russia has stalled out and not that Ukraine has pushed them back. Every month Russia loses about 30k troops and a massive amount of equipment.

The delay was huge Russia was still using 10,000 155, and Ukraine was down to almost nothing. I have already said that Russia will win the long war, but at what cost? If the US gets involved with missiles, Air Force, and Space Force the war is over in a week without a single boot on the ground and no need to use fighters, A-10s, or Apaches. ETC. But if we did put that into play...lol

Under these circumstances, do you think we or NATO should go to war with Russia over Ukraine?

Because it’s appearing to everyone that UA forces simply got outplayed in Avdeevka on this one.

Only way to win that situation, is getting a collective group of countries on there.

You know, against a country that’s apparently only using shovels from prehistoric times etc. with washing machines orbiting in space and “fisher price satellite-try”

originally posted by: AllisVibration
Ron Paul would have made a great president but nobody with any integrity gets anywhere near, we just get these puppet muppets set up to create even more apathy and division. It’s the same throughout the west. Pathetic really, I think the documentary “century of the self” explains where we are in a nutshell.

Well, we know even a braindead guy can be President and the country doesn't collapse. Ron was OK but had a good number of ideals I disagreed with, so there is that. Do you really see Trump as part of the 5ht column whatever that may be? Seems like he is the anti of it all.

originally posted by: Imhere

Under these circumstances, do you think we or NATO should go to war with Russia over Ukraine?

Because it’s appearing to everyone that UA forces simply got outplayed in Avdeevka on this one.

Russia has been trying to take that town since Oct, so UA out outplayed? lol Russia's tactics have always been just to throw bodies until the other side runs out of bullets, it is simple and does work, but hell.

There is nothing between, helping and going to war?

I was in the Air Force for 28 years so I was in every war and skirmish since the early 80s. For the last 15+ years, I have been on the cutting-edge tech side of military Drones, and people just do not know the level of hell the US could rain down on that war scenario. We are talking about trench warfare from WWI almost and the US would bring some crazy levels of their destruction. We have small drones that would fly about 5000 feet and can track anything alive on the ground, even see the faint heat signature of footsteps as people walk. After tracking they are dead... end of story. 10,000 soldiers are just dead no where to run or hide. That is just a small part of it all.

Only way to win that situation, is getting a collective group of countries on there.

You know, against a country that’s apparently only using shovels from prehistoric times etc. with washing machines orbiting in space and “fisher price satellite-try”

Why? The US could provide a limited response and what Putin put into Ukraine would be gone. The first thing is to wipe out every piece of AAA, SAM, and radar-based military equipment, then it is all over as it all is being tracked as we speak. Everything we would do would be from the air and with drones. No need to get into the mud, trenches, and a million landminds.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Do you really see Trump as part of the 5ht column whatever that may be? Seems like he is the anti of it all.

Yeah he talked about draining the swamp, bringing down the deep state and MAGA. I can see why people would get behind him for those reasons alone, on top of that he was an outsider to politics, a businessman who wanted to normalise foreign relations and make deals. Most importantly he was up against Hillary, hated for so many reasons.

The thing is though it’s all rhetoric, and a script that is set to appeal to ideally a majority of voters. That’s why I call them actors. Anyone who cares to do some actual research into the backgrounds of these people will find they are in it for themselves. They are part of that elite club, TPTB, not against it.

But everything is TLDR these days, it’s all sound bites and catch phrases. That is what social media has done for people, given them a platform to voice their opinion on which they don’t really know all that much about.

I mean let’s face it the average person wasn’t all that bright before social media, but now they have the attention span of a gold fish.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Imhere

Under these circumstances, do you think we or NATO should go to war with Russia over Ukraine?

Because it’s appearing to everyone that UA forces simply got outplayed in Avdeevka on this one.

Russia has been trying to take that town since Oct, so UA out outplayed? lol Russia's tactics have always been just to throw bodies until the other side runs out of bullets, it is simple and does work, but hell.

There is nothing between, helping and going to war?

I was in the Air Force for 28 years so I was in every war and skirmish since the early 80s. For the last 15+ years, I have been on the cutting-edge tech side of military Drones, and people just do not know the level of hell the US could rain down on that war scenario. We are talking about trench warfare from WWI almost and the US would bring some crazy levels of their destruction. We have small drones that would fly about 5000 feet and can track anything alive on the ground, even see the faint heat signature of footsteps as people walk. After tracking they are dead... end of story. 10,000 soldiers are just dead no where to run or hide. That is just a small part of it all.

Only way to win that situation, is getting a collective group of countries on there.

You know, against a country that’s apparently only using shovels from prehistoric times etc. with washing machines orbiting in space and “fisher price satellite-try”

Why? The US could provide a limited response and what Putin put into Ukraine would be gone. The first thing is to wipe out every piece of AAA, SAM, and radar-based military equipment, then it is all over as it all is being tracked as we speak. Everything we would do would be from the air and with drones. No need to get into the mud, trenches, and a million landminds.

So what’s the wait up in your opinion? For Ukraine to get demilitarized then go bomb Russia? Because you’re talking about NATO hitting Crimea later for example.

Which you know would escalate it into a different matter.

a reply to: Xtrozero

We have small drones that would fly about 5000 feet and can track anything alive on the ground, even see the faint heat signature of footsteps as people walk. After tracking they are dead... end of story. 10,000 soldiers are just dead no where to run or hide. That is just a small part of it all.

Didn’t you have any of this tech before/during Afghanistan? What went wrong there exactly?

originally posted by: Kenzo

He looked healthy yesterday .


Yesterday, Aleksey Navalny spoke in court via video link. He seemed to be in good health and and even joked.

One of my good friends in his late 30s played Hockey for several hours one Saturday, like he did most weekends, he was in excellent health. After playing Hockey we went and showered and then all went out for drinks that night. Again he appeared very healthy and he laughed and joked all night. The next day he woke up and within 2 hours he dropped dead.

The point being that "looking healthy" and "telling jokes" really don't mean much to judge somebody's overall health especially when they hit their late 40s, like Navaly had. Navaly was also on a very long hunger strike in the past year or more where he lost tons of weight (and he was already super skinny years before) and nearly died from what I remember hearing, which couldn't have been good for his future health either.

Was he murdered? Possibly, we don't know.

Did he die from health complications like a heart attack or stroke? It's a very real possibility as well, men in their late 40s who appear healthy drop dead every single day from Natura causes or other unknown health issues.